Button, Thomas v. Worcester Regional Retirement System (SPR 20260174)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records January 27, 2026 SPR26/0174 James Donnelly, Esq. Counsel Worcester Regional Retirement System Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane, LLP 50 Braintree Hill Office Park, Suite 410 Braintree, MA 02184 Dear Attorney Donnelly: On January 20, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the Worcester Regional Retirement System (System/WRRS) seeking permission to assess fees. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, I understand that the System furnished a copy of this petition to the requestor, Thomas Button. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On January 5, 2026, Mr. Button requested “whatever public record exists that shows the number of pension recipient forms that have not been returned notarized as of 12/31/2025 - and what action WRRS is doing in regards to that!” In an email to this office on January 20, 2026, Mr. Button objected to the System’s petition. Petition to Assess Fees – Municipalities The Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may approve a petition from a municipality to charge for time spent segregating or redacting or to charge in excess of $25 per hour, if the Supervisor determines that 1) the request is for a commercial purpose or 2) the fee represents an actual and good faith representation by the municipality to comply with the request. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). In rendering such a decision, the Supervisor is required to consider the following: a) the public interest served by limiting the cost of public access to the records; b) the financial ability of the requestor to pay the additional or increased fees; and c) any other relevant extenuating circumstances. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). The statute sets out a two-prong test for determining whether the Supervisor may approve One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832 • Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre • pre@sec.state.ma.us

James Donnelly, Esq. SPR26/0174 Page 2 January 27, 2026 a municipality’s petition to allow the municipality to charge for time spent segregating or redacting records. The first prong is whether the request for records was made for a commercial purpose. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). It is my determination that this request was not made for a commercial purpose. The second prong of the test is whether the fee represents an actual and good faith representation by the municipality to comply with the request. The Supervisor must consider 1) if the fee is necessary such that the request could not have been prudently completed without the redaction or segregation or fee in excess of $25 per hour; 2) the amount of the fee is reasonable; and 3) the fee is not designed to limit, deter or prevent access to requested public records. Id. Fee Estimates – Municipalities A municipality may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.05) per page may be assessed for a black and white single or double-sided photocopy of a public record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(i). Municipalities may not assess a fee for the first 2 (two) hours of employee time to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce the record or records requested unless the municipality has 20,000 people or less. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii). Where appropriate, municipalities may include as part of the fee an hourly rate equal to or less than the hourly rate attributed to the lowest paid employee who has the necessary skill required to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce a record requested, but the fee shall not be more than $25 per hour. Id. However, municipalities may charge more than $25 per hour if such rate is approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). A fee shall not be assessed for time spent segregating or redacting records unless such segregation or redaction is required by law or approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). Current Petition to Assess Fees In its petition, the System seeks to assess fees, and explains the following: Based on a review of the WRRS’ records, the WRRS estimates that it possesses approximately 4,567 pension recipient forms. In order to determine which, if any, of the 4,567 pension recipient forms have not been notarized and would therefore be responsive to the Request, the WRRS must review each form individually. Due to the significant time required to complete its search process, the WRRS seeks approval of the instant fee petition. . . . To produce these records, the WRRS provides the following fee estimate. . . .

James Donnelly, Esq. SPR26/0174 Page 3 January 27, 2026 In this case, the lowest paid employee who has the necessary skill required to search for, compile and reproduce the records requested is an employee whose effective hourly rate exceeds $25 per hour. Nevertheless, a rate of $25 per hour will be used to calculate the following fee estimate. Based on a review of the WRRS’ records, the WRRS estimates that it possesses approximately 4,567 pension recipient forms. In order to determine which, if any, of the 4,567 pension recipient forms have not been notarized and would therefore be responsive to the Request, the WRRS must review each form individually. The WRRS conservatively estimates that it will take approximately 45.67 hours (i.e. 100 forms per hour) to review all 4,567 forms and determine which forms, if any, are not notarized and would therefore be responsive to the Request. In accordance with 950 CMR 32.07(2)(m)(2), the requester will be charged for the first two (2) hours of those services. 43.67 hours multiplied by $25 per hour yields a fee estimate of $1,091.75 for the WRRS to complete its search process. The actual fee to produce these records may vary based on the actual time spent to complete the necessary search process. Please be advised that, under 950 C.M.R. 32.07(2)(a) “a records access officer may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection.” In contrast, 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(h)(1) provides that “any records access officer may petition the Supervisor to charge for time spent segregating or redacting records.” In this case, the System has indicated only that it intends to “search for, compile and reproduce the records” and has not indicated that it intends to segregate nor redact records under the various exemptions of the Public Records Law. Where the System is permitted to “assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record,” I find it unnecessary to opine on the System’s January 20th petition requesting permission to assess fees. Conclusion As discussed above, it is unnecessary to opine on the System’s request to assess fees. Mr. Button is advised that he may appeal the System’s fee estimate within ninety (90) days. See 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). In its petition and in its response, the System expresses willingness to work with Mr. Button to narrow the scope of his request. This office encourages Mr. Button and the System to communicate directly in order to facilitate providing records more efficiently and affordably. See G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(vii) (a municipality shall suggest a reasonable modification to the scope of the request or offer to assist the requestor to modify the scope of the request if doing so would enable the municipality to produce records sought more efficiently and affordably). Any subsequent fee estimate from the System must be made in compliance with G. L. c. 66, § 10(b)(viii) and G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii).

James Donnelly, Esq. SPR26/0174 Page 4 January 27, 2026 Please note, Mr. Button has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Thomas Button